> Your average MUD normally lacks the level of interaction between
> game and player (as opposed to player and player) that stand-alone
> computer RPGs achieved in the middle 80's.
I think this is a great identification of the problem with MUDs. The 3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons rules aren't inappropriate for CRPGs (and, in fact, *I* think they were written with computer games in mind) and with a bit of tweaking, they work really well for a MUD.
However, I think a big problem is that there are a lot of "kill-em-all" zones for CircleMUD, but not really any zones that showcase the fusion of combat and problem-solving. Role-playing, as you've noted, really can't happen without some sort of moderator. But, Zork managed to incorporate problem-solving over two decades ago, so why don't CircleMUD zones have these features?
Ultimately, I'm not so sure how much the D&D system needs to be modified to make a MUD playable/fun. It may need some tweaking (really, what doesn't?) but I think zone creation is the important thing to focus on if you want to stick close to 3e rules. Creation of puzzles and quests and the like make for replayability and fun even beyond the combat.
All in all, I'd say be prepared to make a lot of changes, both to the rules and to the lib files to make the game more 3rd Edition-like. In the end, I think it'll be worth it, and might make your game even better!
--
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| FAQ: http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html |
| Archives: http://post.queensu.ca/listserv/wwwarch/circle.html |
| Newbie List: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/circle-newbies/ |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+